Distinguished Co-facilitators,

1. I have the honor to deliver the following remarks on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

2. The Group of 77 and China would like to express its appreciation for the co-facilitators' for conveying today's informal meeting on enhancing the synergies, and coherence and reducing overlap where it is found to exist in the agenda of the General Assembly, Economic and Social Council, and their subsidiary bodies, as well as the high - level political forum, and other the related forums in light of the adoption of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. The Group took note of the co-facilitators draft element paper.

3. The Group of 77 would like to make the following procedural comments on the draft element paper, as follows:

- Mandate of GA resolution: the G77 is of the view that the proposed way forward for the Secretary General (SG) to conduct a survey goes beyond the GA resolution 71/323 (Op30). As the SG has no role or mandate in this process, which should be owned and driven by Member States. The G77 would like to find out if such survey has been conducted before, in the context of the GA process? The role was given to the SG is outside the GA resolution mandate.
 
- Consensus: G77 has a strong conviction that only consensual paragraphs can go to the revitalization process. There has not been time and opportunity to start a negotiation process on this issue. Therefore, in our view, none of the proposed elements enjoys the consensus of all Member States and cannot be introduced as such to the revitalization process. We are in the third year of consultations and we have not reached consensus as Member States have different vision and views of the process. This process should not be un-necessarily rushed, and should give Member States sufficient time to reconcile their differences.

- Role of the President of the General Assembly (PGA). The mandate given through the proposed para in the draft element paper goes beyond the PGA procedural and organizational functions. As well as the role of the Chairs of the committee. Chair of Committee have limited functions. We request that the PGA should continue his work to reach a consensus among Member States.

- Deadline: We have strong reservation over the timeline for the completion of the process in view of the multiple ongoing event, such as the HLPF, we are of the view that the co-facilitators should not impose a deadline on a Member States driven process.

On Substance:

4- The draft proposals should not disregard the effort of last years; it should be built based on the previous co-facilitators work.

5- The G77 has from the first informal consultation on the 3rd of May put forward a clear position paper we have consistently maintained to this day.

6- The G77 underlines that the co-facilitators draft elements paper is their own recommendation, as it does not reflect the view of the G77 Member States nor the balance that should be for the outcome of the intergovernmental process.

Thank you.